GREENSBORO -- Five years ago this month, just as the ACC was celebrating its 50th anniversary with commemorative books and DVDs, it was rendering the chronicles outdated and incomplete. It would be a new era, one marked by the greatest influx of new membership since that May day in 1953 when seven Southern Conference dissidents gathered at Sedgefield Inn and walked out with a league of their own.

The migration of Virginia Tech, Miami and ultimately Boston College from the Big East took the ACC to an even dozen in membership, and it exposed the ACC's leaders to charges they had forsaken Gene Corrigan and embraced Gordon Gekko. Surely, skeptics alleged, this was a frenzied money-grab, one that would make the ACC filthy rich and leave the rest of the Bowl Championship Series structure begging for mercy and advice.

Commissioner John Swofford, on the other hand, always said expansion was about keeping pace rather than world domination, and there is evidence to suggest he was right. A study of the figures released by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Postsecondary Education reveals:

l The ACC hasn't gotten appreciably richer than any other conference lately.

l ACC membership is the best thing to happen to Virginia Tech since Frank Beamer.

l Boston College is another big winner.

l Miami will have to get used to smaller payoffs for success in return for revenue certainty.

It's all relative

The nine ACC schools in place in the summer of 2003 weren't going to tear up a half-century of tradition just to break new ground. They wanted some return on an investment that ended a guaranteed round-robin format in basketball and certain annual meetings with everybody in football. They've gotten it in the form of 31 percent revenue growth from 2003-04 through 2006-07. Who wouldn't take those margins?

Here's the surprising thing: Most everybody else in the power structure of college sports has done that well or better. Between them, the Big 12, Big Ten, SEC, Pac 10 and the University of Notre Dame witnessed gains of 33.33 percent in that frame.

In other words, they slightly outpaced the ACC.

Big-time college sports have remained blissfully free from the turmoil of other sectors in the economy because rooting passions blot out the chaos of the world at large.

"The television marketplace for the bigger conferences -- by and large -- has been very friendly throughout that period of time," said Kevin Weiberg, CEO of the Big Ten Network and former commissioner of the Big 12.

"Almost every conference was able to renegotiate the deals that were in place. Some of that was the result of expansion; some of it was part of the normal course of doing business. That resulted in growth."

In this decade, networks have accepted the reality of a fractured marketplace. Ratings for everything are down because options abound. But sports still have a hold on certain demographic groups -- males between ages 18 and 34 chief among them -- and that has been a sufficiently compelling selling point to win over advertisers and keep the cash flowing.

"It wasn't too many years ago that there was a lot of doom and gloom relative to upcoming TV negotiations," said Kevin White, who left his post as Notre Dame's athletics director last month to take over at Duke.

"People didn't think there was too much more room for growth. But then I read where this conference's package went up by 30 percent and this one went up 28 percent. There's enough competition in the marketplace that major networks are continuing to find major resources."

Further proof of the nationwide growth is seen in the expansion and enhancement of facilities from Wake Forest to Washington. When one power builds luxury suites onto its stadium, rivals feel compelled to match or surpass the construction to save face if not up-front money. Unlike daily support facilities, used by student-athletes and off limits to boosters, VIP seating is a perk with direct benefit to the donor.

Virginia Tech's most recent upgrade of Lane Stadium would have happened without the move to the ACC; it explains much of why the school's football revenue has grown from $21 million in 2002 to an ACC-high $40 million in 2006. Virginia, Clemson and Wake Forest have also undertaken similar ventures lately, linking the carrot of improved seat location or the stick of demotion to donation level.

"It was an incredible period of growth across a lot of fronts," Weiberg said.

No conference has an exclusive or excessive hold on heartstrings. So even though the ACC's football TV contract nearly doubled from the year before expansion through 2006, it didn't necessarily create an advantage for the league.


"To some extent, the ACC's expansion allowed it to get extra revenue streams into play like the championship football game, but more than allowing it to grow past other conferences, it got the ACC in the position where it was maximizing its revenue opportunities," Weiberg said.

Hokie high

The ACC's biggest individual winner has been Virginia Tech, which enjoyed a 68 percent growth in revenue from 2003-04 through 2006-07. Among BCS members, only Stanford (82.8 percent) and Auburn (74.5 percent) experienced greater increases than the Hokies.

Virginia Tech gained an athletics identity in the 1990s with football, and that success allowed the university to graduate from an independent to the Big East in football and from the Metro to the Atlantic 10 to the Big East in everything else. But the changes happened so quickly the school was never in one place long enough to reap the full financial rewards of membership.

It was on track to become fully vested in Big East basketball, but it had to abort those plans. In the summer of 2003, it had a good excuse. It was moving to the ACC, which promised all-sports availability and a more geographically friendly footprint.

In Big East sports other than football, the Hokies had two opponents -- West Virginia and Georgetown, within reasonable driving distance. Now it has at least six.

It all worked out for Tech. The switch of conferences was so natural the remaining Big East football schools excluded Virginia Tech from antitrust and breach-of-contract litigation they filed against the ACC after it all went down (The matter was ultimately settled out of court.).

Finally, after several years of accepting less than a full financial stake in any league because of its various transitions, Virginia Tech became a fully vested member of the ACC in 2006-07.

The harmonic convergence of the stadium upgrades and the move to the ACC meant the Hokies nearly doubled their annual football revenue in four years, going from $21 million in 2002 to an ACC-high $40 million in 2006. Not even Florida State or Clemson, both of which boast home stadiums with 80,000 seats, equaled the Hokies' income.

Basketball has been a big hit as well. The school, which had struggled to form rivalries and an identity, had no such problems when it joined the ACC. It immediately sold out of season tickets in 2004-05, an unprecedented feat in its history. Guaranteed to host Virginia and likely to see at least one of the triumvirate of Duke, North Carolina and Maryland annually, it had something to sell.

The bottom line has been impressive. Virginia Tech athletics reported $65,487,381 in revenue for the tax year ending June 30, 2007.

"We're always trying to grow the business," athletics director Jim Weaver told The Virginian-Pilot of Norfolk.

Elsewhere

Boston College feared it would have to cut sports if it had stayed in the Big East, but its robust athletics department, which includes a sailing team, remained in place when it was ultimately accepted to the ACC in October of 2003, effective July 1, 2005. The Eagles' 60.9 percent growth in revenue from 2003-04 through last year ranks fifth in the BCS.

Miami, on the other hand, has been stagnant. That's because the Big East's financial structure more closely resembles capitalism than socialism by paying out more money to the most successful football programs. The Hurricanes were powerful in their final Big East days and ranked 21st in total revenue in the BCS in 2003-04. Their standing of 41st last year was inevitable regardless of their success rate because the ACC apportions general TV revenues nearly equally among members.

It's not a surprise to the university's administration, which willingly traded the upsides of the Big East for the financial stability of the ACC.

Fans can and will debate the merits of the ACC's revolution for years, but any angst over expansion will inevitably decrease with that time. What's not changing -- relatively speaking -- is the cash flow.


Contact Rob Daniels at 373-7028 or rob.daniels @news-record.com

GROWTH AMONG POWER CONFERENCES, NOTRE DAME
Conf______ 2003-04_______ 2006-07_______ +/-_______ % +/-
ACC * ___$466,308,445__ $623,667,854__ $157,359,409__+33.75%
Big 12___ $568,005,466___$697,126,665__$129,121,189__+22.73%
Pac 10___$383,743,719___$549,982,262__$166,238,543_+43.43%
Big East ^185,184,579___$225,031,275__$39,846,696___+21.51%
SEC____$575,265,018___ $802,141,794__ $226,876,776__+39.44%
Notre Dame $55,039,977__ $83,586,903___ $28,546,926__ +51.86%
TOTALS_ $2,233,547,204_ $2,981,536,753_ $747,989,539__33.48%

* Includes all 12 current ACC members, three of which were Big East schools in 2003-04. ^ Includes only the five schools that have been Big East football members throughout the period.

CURRENT ACC REVENUE GROWTH School
_____________2003-04_____2006-07________ +/-_________ %+/-
Virginia Tech_$38,900,607__ $65,487,381__$26,586,774__+68.34%
Virginia_____$42,465,400_ $64,852,417__ $22,387,017__+52.72%
Boston College_$35,663,942_ $57,392,077__$21,728,135__+60.92%
Clemson____$40,835,150___ $55,741,548__ $14,906,398_+36.50%
North Carolina_$43,885,075__$58,188,501_ $14,303,426__+32.59%
N.C. State__$32,382,028___$42,634,590__ $10,252,562__+31.66%
Georgia Tech_$39,674,362___$49,581,182__ $9,906,820___+24.97% Duke_______$38,988,933___$47,507,169___$8,518,236___+21.85%
Wake Forest_$29,560,866___$36,827,089___$7,266,223__+24.58% Maryland_____$40,472,162___$54,070,746___$13,598,584_+33.60% Miami________$47,470,707___$49,219,738___$1,749,031___+3.68%
Florida State_$36,009,213__$42,165,416___$6,156,203___+17.09%
TOTALS_____ $466,308,445_ $623,667,854_ $157,359,409_ 33.75%

I bet the Big East avg would be closer to 33% if he included Louisville,USF and Cincy

Thank you John Swofford. With out your wisdom and foresight the ACC would be fighting to survive in a market that continues to trend upward. Your timing was impeccable.

We'd also like to "thank" John Swofford. Without Swofford we would have numerous Top 25 football teams, a record breaking television contract, one of the Top 4 BCS football conferences statistically, improved facilities, improved Olympic sports and a new Lacrosse league. :) People are quick to forget what the Big East has accomplished, especially a lot of C-USA and ACC fans.

XLance Wrote:Thank you John Swofford. With out your wisdom and foresight the ACC would be fighting to survive in a market that continues to trend upward. Your timing was impeccable.

Hail XLance!

Now I see where the $157 million figure is coming from, so no need to respond over on the Boneyard. I mistakenly thought someone had said this was the total conference revenue to be distributed back to ACC teams.

As for how useful this figure truly is, you do realize that if the Big East conference totals included UL, UC, and USF, that the ACC would rank 5th in terms of percentage of growth in revenue increase from 2003 until now, ahead of only the Big 12, right?

Better to stick with conference payouts than these figures since all of the major conferences have experienced great growth since 2003.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

XLance Wrote:Thank you John Swofford. With out your wisdom and foresight the ACC would be fighting to survive in a market that continues to trend upward. Your timing was impeccable.

Hail XLance!

Now I see where the $157 million figure is coming from, so no need to respond over on the Boneyard. I mistakenly thought someone had said this was the total conference revenue to be distributed back to ACC teams.

As for how useful this figure truly is, you do realize that if the Big East conference totals included UL, UC, and USF, that the ACC would rank 5th in terms of percentage of growth in revenue increase from 2003 until now, ahead of only the Big 12, right?

Better to stick with conference payouts than these figures since all of the major conferences have experienced great growth since 2003.

Cheers,
Neil

And it'll be interesting to see how much more the Big East will grow now that we have the new television deal. Obviously the increase in money alone from the television deal significantly improve the Big East's growth, but the exposure, and thus increased ticket sales and merchandising alone will pay huge dividends.

omnicarrier Wrote:

XLance Wrote:Thank you John Swofford. With out your wisdom and foresight the ACC would be fighting to survive in a market that continues to trend upward. Your timing was impeccable.

Hail XLance!

Now I see where the $157 million figure is coming from, so no need to respond over on the Boneyard. I mistakenly thought someone had said this was the total conference revenue to be distributed back to ACC teams.

As for how useful this figure truly is, you do realize that if the Big East conference totals included UL, UC, and USF, that the ACC would rank 5th in terms of percentage of growth in revenue increase from 2003 until now, ahead of only the Big 12, right?

Better to stick with conference payouts than these figures since all of the major conferences have experienced great growth since 2003.

Cheers,
Neil

Indeed. I just realized that most of those articles are quoting the $157,359,409 which is actually TOTAL REVENUE GROWTH for ALL 12 ACC schools which includes such things as attendance, etc.

The monies have always been reported accutately.
Total revenue $159,753,654.
Monies distributed to the 12 conference members $137,500,000.

XLance Wrote:The monies have always been reported accutately.
Total revenue $159,753,654.
Monies distributed to the 12 conference members $137,500,000.

You're right and meu culpa. I mistakingly saw the $157 million and thought that was the number the papers were quoting was revenue distributed ($159 million) without looking at the numbers more closely.

Thanks SO#1 for putting the article from the Greensboro News and Record on the board. One thing you could say for the ACC office (especially here in Greensboro), is that financial information is never kept a secret and is always readily available.
The chart shows several telling tales: 1) there are no numbers for the Big 10 (they must not be very open with their information) 2) why everyone wanted(s) Notre Dame. Their revenue growth has been better than any conference by a wide margin while fielding some of the worst football teams in the school's history 3) the rich are getting richer....the more you have...the easier it is to get more 4) it's not over....there is too much money at stake

XLance Wrote:Thanks SO#1 for putting the article from the Greensboro News and Record on the board. One thing you could say for the ACC office (especially here in Greensboro), is that financial information is never kept a secret and is always readily available.

Yep, got to give the ACC their due in this regard. I also like how when the detail is given, they break out their figures much more clearly than any other conference.

Quote:The chart shows several telling tales: 1) there are no numbers for the Big 10 (they must not be very open with their information) 2) why everyone wanted(s) Notre Dame. Their revenue growth has been better than any conference by a wide margin while fielding some of the worst football teams in the school's history 3) the rich are getting richer....the more you have...the easier it is to get more 4) it's not over....there is too much money at stake

Big Ten conference numbers usually don't come out until August because I believe that is when they have their meetings (late July - early August). I'm especially interested in seeing how the BTN has impacted their revenue monies.

Cheers,
Neil

GROWTH AMONG POWER CONFERENCES, NOTRE DAME
Conf______ 2003-04_______ 2006-07_______ +/-_______ % +/-
ACC * ___$466,308,445__ $623,667,854__ $157,359,409__+33.75%
Big 12___ $568,005,466___$697,126,665__$129,121,189__+22.73%
Pac 10___$383,743,719___$549,982,262__$166,238,543_+43.43%
Big East ^185,184,579___$225,031,275__$39,846,696___+21.51%
BE (8)__$255,132,070___$336,649,932___$81,517,862___+24.21%
SEC____$575,265,018___ $802,141,794__ $226,876,776__+39.44%
B10____$596,981,426____$766,253,733__$169,272,307__+22.09%
Notre Dame $55,039,977__ $83,586,903___ $28,546,926__ +51.86%
TOTALS_ $2,233,547,204_ $2,981,536,753_ $747,989,539__33.48%

From my database I included all BE teams and B10

* Includes all 12 current ACC members, three of which were Big East schools in 2003-04. ^ Includes only the five schools that have been Big East football members throughout the period.

CURRENT ACC REVENUE GROWTH School
_____________2003-04_____2006-07________ +/-_________ %+/-
Virginia Tech_$38,900,607__ $65,487,381__$26,586,774__+68.34%
Virginia_____$42,465,400_ $64,852,417__ $22,387,017__+52.72%
Boston College_$35,663,942_ $57,392,077__$21,728,135__+60.92%
Clemson____$40,835,150___ $55,741,548__ $14,906,398_+36.50%
North Carolina_$43,885,075__$58,188,501_ $14,303,426__+32.59%
N.C. State__$32,382,028___$42,634,590__ $10,252,562__+31.66%
Georgia Tech_$39,674,362___$49,581,182__ $9,906,820___+24.97% Duke_______$38,988,933___$47,507,169___$8,518,236___+21.85%
Wake Forest_$29,560,866___$36,827,089___$7,266,223__+24.58% Maryland_____$40,472,162___$54,070,746___$13,598,584_+33.60% Miami________$47,470,707___$49,219,738___$1,749,031___+3.68%
Florida State_$36,009,213__$42,165,416___$6,156,203___+17.09%


_BE FB________2003-2004______2006-2007_______+/-_______%+/-
Connecticut__$43,026,031______$52,811,643___$9,785,612____22.74%
Louisville_____$35,084,742_____$54,589,997___$19,505,255___55.59%
West Virginia__$37,808,838_____$46,970,708___$9,161,870____26.11%
Syracuse_____$40,639,624______$43,732,382___$3,092,758_____7.60%
Rutgers______$31,940,494______$44,050,960___$12,110,466___37.92%
Pittsburgh____$28,279,680______$37,465,582___$9,185,902____32.48%
Cincinnati____$19,843,554______$28,868,029___$9,024,475____45.48%
South Florida_$18,509,107______$28,160,631___$9,651,524____52.14%

The percentages were wrong thank Neil

We’ll see the benefit of the new Big East contract next summer.

SO#1 Wrote:GROWTH AMONG POWER CONFERENCES, NOTRE DAME
Conf______ 2003-04_______ 2006-07_______ +/-_______ % +/-
ACC * ___$466,308,445__ $623,667,854__ $157,359,409__+33.75%
Big 12___ $568,005,466___$697,126,665__$129,121,189__+22.73%
Pac 10___$383,743,719___$549,982,262__$166,238,543_+43.43%
Big East ^185,184,579___$225,031,275__$39,846,696___+21.51%
BE (8)__$255,132,070___$336,649,932___$81,517,862___+24.21%
SEC____$575,265,018___ $802,141,794__ $226,876,776__+39.44%
B10____$596,981,426____$766,253,733__$169,272,307__+22.09%
Notre Dame $55,039,977__ $83,586,903___ $28,546,926__ +51.86%
TOTALS_ $2,233,547,204_ $2,981,536,753_ $747,989,539__33.48%

From my database I included all BE teams and B10

* Includes all 12 current ACC members, three of which were Big East schools in 2003-04. ^ Includes only the five schools that have been Big East football members throughout the period.

CURRENT ACC REVENUE GROWTH School
_____________2003-04_____2006-07________ +/-_________ %+/-
Virginia Tech_$38,900,607__ $65,487,381__$26,586,774__+68.34%
Virginia_____$42,465,400_ $64,852,417__ $22,387,017__+52.72%
Boston College_$35,663,942_ $57,392,077__$21,728,135__+60.92%
Clemson____$40,835,150___ $55,741,548__ $14,906,398_+36.50%
North Carolina_$43,885,075__$58,188,501_ $14,303,426__+32.59%
N.C. State__$32,382,028___$42,634,590__ $10,252,562__+31.66%
Georgia Tech_$39,674,362___$49,581,182__ $9,906,820___+24.97% Duke_______$38,988,933___$47,507,169___$8,518,236___+21.85%
Wake Forest_$29,560,866___$36,827,089___$7,266,223__+24.58% Maryland_____$40,472,162___$54,070,746___$13,598,584_+33.60% Miami________$47,470,707___$49,219,738___$1,749,031___+3.68%
Florida State_$36,009,213__$42,165,416___$6,156,203___+17.09%


_BE FB________2003-2004______2006-2007_______+/-_______%+/-
Connecticut__$43,026,031______$52,811,643___$9,785,612____18.52%
Louisville_____$35,084,742_____$54,589,997___$19,505,255___35.73%
West Virginia__$37,808,838_____$46,970,708___$9,161,870____19.5%
Syracuse_____$40,639,624______$43,732,382___$3,092,758_____7.07%
Rutgers______$31,940,494______$44,050,960___$12,110,466___27.49%
Pittsburgh____$28,279,680______$37,465,582___$9,185,902____24.51%
Cincinnati____$19,843,554______$28,868,029___$9,024,475____31.26%
South Florida_$18,509,107______$28,160,631___$9,651,524____34.27%

We’ll see the benefit of the new Big East contract next summer.

Thanks SO for the numbers. I would have thought that the three newcomers would have seen a higher percentage increase than what I see here. I expected to see more along the lines of VT/BC % increases.

Don't think the TV contract numbers will significantly impact these numbers, keeping in mind that conference payouts in their entirety usually only account for between 18-22% of the monies listed in this chart.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:Thanks SO for the numbers. I would have thought that the three newcomers would have seen a higher percentage increase than what I see here. I expected to see more along the lines of VT/BC % increases.

Don't think the TV contract numbers will significantly impact these numbers, keeping in mind that conference payouts in their entirety usually only account for between 18-22% of the monies listed in this chart.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil, I used the wrong year to calculate the percentage, 2006-2007 instead of 2003-2004. your are right. They are about the same as VT & BCU.

Thanks for the numbers.
On the BE side the things that are surprising; that UConn has so much revenue, and that Pittsburgh has so little.

Look at flippin' Virginia!! They aren't good at much, except makin' ca$h!!! Joking aside, I am not bashin' them, my sweet grandmother hails from Richmond.

Haha! Just thought of this: my other sweet grandmother is from Pittsburgh, so go Panthers!!

XLance Wrote:Thanks SO#1 for putting the article from the Greensboro News and Record on the board. One thing you could say for the ACC office (especially here in Greensboro), is that financial information is never kept a secret and is always readily available.
The chart shows several telling tales: 1) there are no numbers for the Big 10 (they must not be very open with their information) 2) why everyone wanted(s) Notre Dame. Their revenue growth has been better than any conference by a wide margin while fielding some of the worst football teams in the school's history 3) the rich are getting richer....the more you have...the easier it is to get more 4) it's not over....there is too much money at stake

What do you mean by #4, X?

Uconn and Louisville make more than Miami.

Frankly the financials are the only good news the ACC has had since the merger. I'd like to know what parts of these figrues comes from TV, attendance, etc, etc. Clearly the championship game attendance is much lower than expected and Miami hasn't half-filled a stadium in two years.

If TV revenue makes up a huge part of the ACC's financial success, then it is based on speculaton. Swofford did the good job of selling the conference as the "best in the nation." He can't make that pitch again. Their BCS history is clear. Their NCAA bids are low. The SEC may exceed the new ACC in BB as well as FB.

When Xlance says there's more money to be made- there's not much more the ACC can do with these 12 teams. Even if they improve on the field, their TV revenue is expected to drop. Miami/FSU won't ever be the natinal highlight Swofford sold them to be. There's too much change on the FB landscape. Years ago when I suggested that USF would be better than Miami and FSU- I was laughed off these boards- even by USF fans.

The ACC's problem is not the BE but the SEC. The SEC is too strong in the ACC's footprint.

The ACC's financial numbers look good but I don't think they are celebrating as much as they want you to think. When you talk about college FB on the field play, the BE is generally regarded as an overperforming success- the ACC is generally thought of as an underachieving failure. (Don't be mad at me- you've all read the articles.) The ACC is still desperate for a WVU-type team to anchor their financials and sell their conference into the future. In the meantime, they can talk about how much money they're stealing--Uh, I meant to say, making.